Originally posted by hopscotchSo am I, you should know better.
You write:A small question: In what ways does the 2010 RHP Prose Competition's procedural anonymity theme (short term) with its required email address disclosure to an ad hoc group protect/not violate a subscriber's contractual rights of privacy (long term)?And you expect a serious reply to this? After reading that I'm wondering why I bother to explain things to you in the first place.
The post that was quoted here has been removedPlease answer the question... 'In what ways does the 2010 RHP Prose Competition's procedural anonymity theme (short term) with
its required email address disclosure to an ad hoc group protect/not violate a subscriber's contractual rights of privacy (long term)?'
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyIn the years that I ran the competition I collected many email addresses which I then used to sign people up to various pornography sites and Mormon newsletters.
Please answer the question... 'In what ways does the 2010 RHP Prose Competition's procedural anonymity theme (short term) with
its required email address disclosure to an ad hoc group protect/not violate a subscriber's contractual rights of privacy (long term)?'
1 edit
Originally posted by hopscotchMe too. In fact I went further and used them to implicate members in several jewel heists and acts of terrorism.
In the years that I ran the competition I collected many email addresses which I then used to sign people up to various pornography sites and Mormon newsletters.
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyThere is an alternative to sending it via email if you are really that concerned.
Please answer the question... 'In what ways does the 2010 RHP Prose Competition's procedural anonymity theme (short term) with
its required email address disclosure to an ad hoc group protect/not violate a subscriber's contractual rights of privacy (long term)?'
